A massive review of science literature has found no risks to humans or environment by GMOs

[Morph]

However, Hansen told me, while all of the individual comparisons—say, kidney dysfunction or mammary tumors between 10 females eating a certain level of GMO feed and 10 females eating non-GMO feed—are "statistically insignificant" because of sample size, taken as a whole, the results paint a troubling picture. Overall, the study made 54 comparisons between treated rats and control rats, and in all but four of them—two involving females, two involving males—the treated rats showed worse outcomes. "That's suggestive that there's something going on and there that should be further research," he said.

But that said, I'm all for more long-term studies.

Not going to happen if Monsanto keeps infiltrating the scientific research publishing companies. They have infiltrated our government (Michael Taylor) AND scientific journal publishers (Richard E. Goodman).

So what happened? Well, in some groups, the rats got more cancer than controls. But not always. In fact, the authors had to cherry-pick their own data to support their conclusions.

Those "some" groups are the treatment groups. The point of the study was to show that the treatment groups (aka the group that was fed GMO) would develop cancer at higher rates than the control groups. As it turns out, the treatment groups did in fact develop cancer at higher rates than the control groups (see the quote above).

and why aren't americans who eat GM corn getting cancer like that then? cancer rates have remained flat.

Cancer rates have no in fact "remained flat":

• In 2005, the American Cancer Society estimated 1,372,190 new cancer patients.
• In 2013, the American Cancer Society estimated 1,660,290 new cancer patients.

That's an increase of over 280,000 new cancer patients in an 8 year span.




What's most surprising to me though is the change in number in digestive system cancers (stomach, colon, liver, etc):

• In 2005, the American Cancer Society estimated 253,500 new stomach system cancers
• In 2013, the American Cancer Society estimated 290,000 new stomach system cancers

What's even MORE surprising still, or frightening, is the change in number of new Kidney cancer cases. Remember how a majority of the treatment rats in the GMO study developed 'severe kidney and liver disease', well:

• In 2005, the American Cancer Society estimated 36,160 new kidney cancer patients
• In 2013, the American Cancer Society estimated 65,150 new kidney cancer patients

New kidney cancer cases have increased 80% in the last 8 years. How can you say that cancer has remained flat when the same cancers that have been linked to GMO consumption have increased well over 80% in the last 8 years?





It's like a New Age Tuskeegee Experiment. Trust the gubbament, brehs. Get on that Monsanto diet, brehs.

all 1800 of those studies are fake, huh?

One has to wonder why a company such as Monsanto:

• has spent 2 decades lobbying our government to label their food "safe to eat"
• has lobbied our government to pass a law protecting their monopoly (Food Modernization Act of 2010)
• lobbied the president to create a special policy czar at the FDA
• made a former Monsanto VP the first to hold that newly created director position
• infiltrated a scientific journal publisher that published the longest running GMO study that painted GMO consumption in a very negative light
• copyrights their seeds when they claim to want to help poor farmers live at a subsistence level
• is the largest client of one of the most corrupt mercenary companies in the world

 

[Morph]

forgot to link cancer stats from the ACA

http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@nho/documents/document/caff2005f4pwsecuredpdf.pdf
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-036845.pdf

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

so one guy makes a study that contradicts decades of studies and this is the guy you're going to believe.

You're right about the cancer thing, they have increased. But you're looking at it in a vacuum and not at any other factors.

Also they have increased as much as they have in Europe and Europe doesn't eat nearly as much GMOs as us.

 

[PikaDaDon]

If I wanted to be a farmer and grow my own food where do I buy non-GMO seeds?

 

[CHL]

This. People seem to be unable to distinguish between criticizing GMOs and criticizing companies that promote GMOs.

There's no evidence that GMOs themselves are harmful to consume. Criticisms of the business practices surrounding them seem to be pretty justified, however.

QFT

 

[Mowgli]

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalfood43.htm

 

[Dirty_Jerz]

Flash back in time. Back to the future.

 

[Dirty_Jerz]

You can taste the difference the minute rights have been purchased. b*stards.

 

[Yapdatfool]

If I wanted to be a farmer and grow my own food where do I buy non-GMO seeds?

You don't.
Unless you wanna get sued or killed .

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

I'm actually surprised how civil this thread is besides a post or two.

 

[OsO]

1) EM radiation from anything electronic, but especially cpus and cell phones because of proximity to the body and duration of exposure, has already been shown to alter the behavior and function of human cells.

2) no, i dont think enough precautions are being taken in cases like this. you cant genetically modify food without modifying its effects on the human body. and what exactly are those effects? i'd say we need that information before we introduce it to 300 million people on a mass scale. to me thats just common sense if you care about people's health.

if they want to implement this shh then do more thorough scientific research. we should have scientists screaming from every corner of the world about the positive and/or normal effects of GM foods, but we dont... we have corporations largely in favor of it (for obvious reasons) and a huge amount of people around the world who are against it.

3) all this is really beside the point because we are not receiving the benefits from the risk we're taking with GMOs. we are supposed to be getting an economic benefit for taking this health risk, and thats not happening. we're taking all the risk because and receiving none of the benefit.

i cant believe i have to explain shyt like this.